Racism in Medieval Studies

These people are mentally ill. You don't even have to be racist to join the group of 'evil whities', you just have to want to engage with your field academically rather than politically.

Attached: adammiya.png (1214x986, 369K)

hence my third question - nazis like politics, so everyone who likes politics should do a big long think about whether they might accidentally be a nazi or not, right?
all you've said is "don't interpret history under a nationalist lens, instead interpret history under a globalist lens!" which is a worthless substitution. if you meant to say "historians should try to portray history accurately" then just give me a second to dig out the "biggest waste of a paragraph ever" award, next you'll be telling me that people get wet when they stand out in the rain

This is Yea Forums not /pol/ you need to lrn2read

When they say white supremacist they mean it very loosely and indirectly, it's another one of these academic redefinings that are, or are at least indistinguishable from attempts at subversion.
Inb4 a bunch of leftists entering the thread saying "I'm not like those SJWs" while they carry water for them every time, every fucking time a gaggle of faggots coming in who won't defend the actions but just want you to stop talking about it.
>It's hard, maybe even impossible to escape your bias, therefore you should just run full tilt in the other direction and embrace it.
It's just a fucking power grab, we're so powerless against this shit.

Attached: 1502449624209.jpg (1280x1381, 152K)

There is no doubt truth to the claim that medievalism has been co-opted by brainlets for political capital (see: DEUS VULT kids), but why should medieval scholarship have to then pay the price for this?

Anyway, the article, if you'd read it all, only concerns itself momentarily with the political repurposing of medieval language. On the whole, the debate in medieval scholarly circles is one of decentering the West and removing the focus on European (white) nations from Western academia. There seems to be no reason beyond this but a politics of envy on the part of the Medievalists of Color. The user you're replying to is more likely engaging with that area of the article. Inherently, a people studying their own history is not intrinsically self-supremacist, so why is it being seen as such?

Wow, clown world indeed! I jjust started Culture of Critique and this fits in perfectly with what I have read so far. We need to start deconstructing post modernism, use it's own tools against it!

Attached: 1555377961907.gif (400x300, 1.64M)

user! You sound like you need to attend your Whiteness Workshop!

If anything, it's at least comforting to know that the 99.9% of the planet either don't give a shit about these people, or actively dislike them. Eventually the pendulum will swing the other way, and this demonisation of Europeans will diminish. I hope that happens sooner, rather than later. I'm getting rather tired of this 'original sin' approach to whiteness.

Attached: flagellation.png (1548x566, 104K)

Oh I didn't think you were serious about that but okay. The problem is that white supremacists will project modern political ideology onto a historical subject, which is what I wrote about in the post you responded too. It has nothing to do with the association of the subject with white supremacist ideology, which is the "argument about inherence" I wrote about in that last post, too. Maybe you didn't understand that. I take you to mean, that you want to portray the argument to be something like:
>If X is liked by nazis, then x is nazi ideology
Which is ridiculous, no doubt, but remember in the last post, which you responded to, where I quoted the author saying "...right out of the 21st century"? It hasn't always been the 21st century. Clearly the author isn't implying that there's something inherent in the subject that makes white supremacists associate it, but that there's something happening in the 21st century that is drawing white supremacists, specifically amateur historians and enthusiasts, to this topic.

I assume a reference to your reading comprehension would be redundant and passé at this point in our exchange but I am an extremely bitter man and being brisk in these Internet fights is how I feel better about myself.

>I just want to read about knight
Stop with the white supremacy then

>Shakespeare plays’ve never messed around with sex and race in their casting

Oh wait, this isn’t a lit thread

>Inherently, a people studying their own history is not intrinsically self-supremacist, so why is it being seen as such?
It's because the idea of a more or less flourishing principally white civilisation runs in direct contrast to the current accepted worldview of racial diversity being paramount in the construction of a country. If you allow people to point to the past and say "things were perfectly fine when we were nearly 100% white" then your insistence that diversity is a strength starts to sound a bit hollow. The solution is to insist either that medieval Europe had significant non-white ethnic diversity (which is a complete lie), or to employ the similar but more subtle tactic of refocusing medieval history to study non-whites in medieval Europe and contemporaneous non-white civilisations in order to bury the issue.

White fragiliy=White rejection of nonsense. The best response to this trope is laughter.

Are you defending the stance of the Medievalists of Color; that the field needs to change to escape any associations with white supremacy? And if you are, do you not think that perhaps the associations with white supremacy are being overblown, and subsequently being used as a stick to beat down genuine, respected academics so that they may be replaced and the field 'washed over' by the waves of critical theory?

Not him, but:

>white supremacists will project modern political ideology onto a historical subject
On a more fundamental level, I'd say that they're using a historical subject as proof of the viability of their modern political ideology.

>there's something happening in the 21st century that is drawing white supremacists, specifically amateur historians and enthusiasts, to this topic
Given that we live in a civilisation that explicitly attempts to "progress" beyond the past, and often criticises it for its failings in contrast with modern political agendas, it's no wonder that opponents of modern politic views will defend the past and use it as evidence to support their views.

I'm so glad I have you muted most of the time, Absolutely inane contributions.

>using a historical subject as proof of the viability of their modern political ideology
Again, also not the guy you're replying to, but what do you mean here?

Attached: clown world honkler song.jpg (409x1024, 119K)

>5 or 6
like who?

>replies anyway
What the fuck is wrong with you retard

There's a difference between theatre and movies in that cinema has developed into a hyperrealistic space (inb4 random exception). They manufacture accurate clothes, armour, flavour with original language, show living conditions of average people and the tools they used, use correct horse breeds and saddles and then they cast fucking Africans to play the kings and queens. It's an outrage really, if only for the aesthetics. There could just as well be giraffes running around in a Shackleton biography.

Jews*6

all the letters of the lgbt community specially T

I just wanted to tell Butterfly how annoying she is, don't cry, user.

user, how do you mute tripfriends? i must know

Attached: 1556960480390.jpg (642x859, 77K)

Calling out white fragility is just a pseudo intellectual way of saying "u mad?"

Well, the argument would go that racial diversity is unnecessary because powerful and culturally rich civilisations were formed in medieval Europe by countries consisting almost entirely of ethnic whites. Some would go even further and say that that racial diversity has destroyed or is destroying that flourishing white civilisation.

all internecine academic slap fights like this should be purged from Yea Forums because its not about any book and it's gay

I'm right wing but this shit is absolutely cringey and always has been.

That's a very longwinded way to say propaganda is the answer.

Go to Settings>Filters + Post Hiding>Filter and highlight specific posts, and then press Edit, and post Butterfly's tripcode under the Patterns heading. It's improved my browsing experience 100-fold.

I understand this academic way of thinking where everything has latent political meaning but people don't act on those terms human beings are shortsighted and unpredictable, if someone ends up studying Medieval literature it's not because they schematized a traditionalist politics or elevation of the individual scholar. They probably just followed what they were good at. Are we supposed to resent people whose skills and interests naturally tend away from the mainstream?

And what do even mean by this?

>There's a difference between theatre and movies
Hahaha give me a break

>"U mad?"
Why yes, I am a bit upset about being attacked for alleged mortal failings by a group which, despite making up only 13% of the population...

>Medieval
>Shakespeare
This is why most people filter you.

This is straight up Maoism with American characteristics.

thank you, as an /x/ emigre who has lost his home to tripfriends, this will help in the crusade to reclaim my birthright

Attached: 1556854974834.jpg (720x720, 89K)

>duuuuurrrrrrr I just wanted to totally pwn the attentionwhore by giving it attention hurrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr
kill yourself you braindead faggot

>Let’s have a discussion about how our discipline is being used by people who admit to wanting to carry out genocides
>hurrrr fuggin gommies

DAS RITE we wuz charliemane n sheit

modern leftism is a managerial ideology, unlike marxists, they don't see history as having a telos culminating in communism, they see history as a threat to be contained. And unlike postmodernists theirs is not a quasi nietzschean project of questioning knowledge power structures, they want to establish an eternal present ruled over by a monolithic managerial framework centered on 'diversity and inclusion', the emotional dynamics of social media. Their referent is no longer the october revolution like it was to marxist classicist whoproduced valuable scholarship, but gamergate and donald trump's election. Monks retrospectively become 'incels'.

If it was just about studying muh minorities alongside most wouldnt care but both sides are to into this faggy revisionism rn

this

Damn I got btfo

I honestly prefer maoists to dr who shitlib beardo male feminists

>Are we supposed to resent people whose skills and interests naturally tend away from the mainstream?
Yes, natural talent is a myth created by white supremacists to elevate the idea that certain people are inherently better than other people.

But, on a serious note, you are absolutely right. People don't go into academia for any explicit political ends. However, I think there can be an argument made for the fact that people do take their sociopolitical baggage with them into any career they choose, and this subsequently influences any resultant behaviour whilst in that career. Obviously, there is nothing inherently wrong with this - but where normal people just see a person trying to get on with their job, these fledging academics (who circle like sharks around any respected member of the field) see an opportunity to jump on any innate biases being expressed incidentally by the person. Of course, this is ridiculous; an old man who would rather study Old English numbering systems than the settler-coloniser dynamic of a character in Beowulf may be inadvertently presenting his socio (and perhaps racial) biases towards a particular field of study, but it's obviously not some kind of politically-charged deliberate avoidance of engaging with race - he just simply isn't interested in it. That's why opinions like the tweet in are so damaging. They ascribe a motive to these actions and attempt to blame innocent academics for literally just not wanting to engage with something that they can potentially lose their job for engaging with in the wrong way. It's absurd and horribly unfair.

Sorry, reading back, that was basically just a big nonsense rant, but hey-ho.

>Shakespeare never wrote about medieval characters
This is why I should able to filter you.

Nice pic. My boards “birthright” was once teaming with trips. It was a lovely board then.

Laughing at them is better than crying.

Attached: 1556962603553.jpg (264x191, 4K)

have sex

>People don't go into academia for any explicit political ends
>believing this

I here this opinion a lot, but I think you seriously underestimate:
A. The conviction of its core advocates. Most SJWs are just white/brown girls who are just brainlessly following social trends and taking the most good sounding opinions, but there is a not insignificant demographic of ‘authentic’ radicals, for whom this whole movement offers the most direct and available path to power. This includes garish trannies who would be legitimately hated anywhere else, parasitic blacks who can earn a middle class lifestyle off the guilt of upper class whites, and people with genuine complaints to air against the system. For these people, there is not an easy alternative.
B. The intelligence of its actions. These people are often painted as naive idiots, and a lot of them are, but the actual strategy they employ are no less brilliant or tactical than that of the fascists, communists, anticommunists, etc. What these groups and ideologies are doing is effectively rooting themselves into some of the oldest and most prestigious institutions of academia, as well as most emerging political campaigns, then alienating possible opposition from even getting the basic experience or credentials necessary to oppose them. If you take the top twenty universities/colleges in America, and figure that these organizations drive one conservative student out of academia per year per institution (it’s probably much higher than this), that’s effectively two hundred potential academics per decade that have been removed from a point of power. It’s even worse for political campaigns- if you seriously think people who spend their twenties involved in political organizing and agitating aren’t going to have more experience and connections than some normie sharing memes about how stupid the SJWs are on Facebook, then you’re the one who’s naive.
C. The real economic incentives. The world economy isn’t going to get any less competitive in the future, and academic politics have always been brutal. By banding together as a core, these people can negotiate their own economic interests more effectively than isolated actors. If you look closely, many of these protests involve either 1. The firing of one or multiple professors (job competition), and 2. the hiring of ‘professors of colour’ or ‘diversity advocates’ or otherwise expansion of an already cumbersome ideological-administrative apparatus. Unless you’re part of an ethnic corporation which can offer similar benefits, and I’m certain most conservative thinkers in the next 20 years will be Jewish for exactly this reason, you won’t stand much of a chance in the brutal competition of this coming century.

Makes me kind of feel bad for the leftists on here. She's just so damn embarrassing.

lmao calm down incel

Well, usually, people go into politics if they have political ends. Of course, I'll admit that some fields of academia (probably political science and the like) are more politically-charged - but I hardly think you can count medieval scholarship as one such field.

I think the influence of critical theory is useful only to the extent it gets us to question our modern presuppositions, but I think a lot of the worries your second question expresses, stems from certain modern presuppositions that persist in the critical theory school. There's always the danger that observation will be theory laden. I think including accounts of different parts of society is extremely important in history. For example, most of recorded history is the history of the elites, while we need archeology to uncover the history of the poor. Drawing in accounts from women, non-whites, etc., can only benefits the study of the period, but only so long as we preface it with a difference understanding of what it meant to be a woman/not white in European society back then.

There's always the danger of reading modern values into history, but the widening of sources and the interest in peripheral accounts benefits history more than it can hurt it.

>using a historical subject as proof
Yeah I agree, I think that's the ultimate intention, and that's what I think is so dangerous. If they're looking for a proof, they'll read into medieval history the conditions that they want to build in modern circumstances. I'm against the idea that history should be studied to "prove" an ideology.

>opponents of modern political views will defend the past
That's true too. In Rome, speakers often referred to the "mos maiorum", or the way of the forefathers. But what I think is dangerous about this is that they will interpret the past to be in line with the political views that they think are contrary to modern progressivism. Maybe they are contrary views, but people in the Middle Ages had no conception of progressivism, nor a conception of race anything like ours. (sry to longpost, this is turning into an interesting discussion)

It is all just a way to make white people learn to hate themselves. If they can change how white history is taught to our children they think they will achieve this. Read Culture of Critique. Just read it.

>let's force a discussion ab out how another field of study can be turned into an intersectional think tank
Honestly, at least the people who want to carry out genocides have a real passion for medieval era rather than just a cynical political agenda.

This. A good example of the practical effects of this sort of thing is the game Kingdom Come Deliverance, which is an RPG set in medieval Bohemia. During development someone criticised the game devs for not including black people in medieval Bohemia, and the devs replied that obviously they didn't because there weren't any (technically they were wrong there since there were probably an insignificant number of blacks). This then created a huge furore, with people swearing blind that there were enough blacks present in medieval Bohemia to justify putting them into the game, and the game was pretty nastily reviewed as a result. It was quite buggy to be fair, but a lot of the negative criticism originated in that initial refusal to shoe-horn black NPCs into the game.

The article is clearly about politics, shouldn't that be contained to /pol/? Nobody seriously pays attention to wannabe commissars in western academia attempting to blackwash history. Any historian will tell you that yes, there were black and brown mercenaries. And also that locals were xenophobic as fuck. And for a good reason - passing foreign armies meant shitton of violence and plundering.

Whats so bad about genocide when the alternative amounts to reducing all humanity to a single mass of wheelchair bound polyamorous blobs with pink hair ruled over by an intersectional theocracy of POZ? isn't that genocide by any other means?

Will many SJWs relax and loosen up? Sure, once they’ve completely dominated their respective domains and can act from a point of security. At this point all the ideological Lynch mobs become part of the upper class mythos of “the excesses of youth”, while ideological subalterns retreat to anonymous internet spaces having been effectively excluded from the economy of power. At this point, the next generation of youth finds some new fascism to enthusiastically embrace, for self righteous ethical concerns masking real economic/social motivations

Very true. I'd add that one of the reasons they keep winning is that they base themselves in a very strong, and very difficult to manoeuvre around, set of moral foundations: the core tenet being that white people are inherently racist, and that therefore all actions taken to counter that racism are inherently noble. It's very good, and very hard to argue when you're presented both with historical issues like the Slave Trade, the Crusades and the Holocaust. Its even worse when you have brainlets like Richard Spencer embodying this bogeyman image of The White Man.

The reason that conservatives keep losing is that they do not base themselves in any similar rooted ideology. They stand against, rather than standing for. Inevitably, time progresses, conservatives lose, and they re-arrange themselves politically to be the 'pushback' (a hopelessly vain effort) against whatever the new political frontier is. You can see this with gay rights, and soon conservatives will have to swallow trans rights too. Until the Right actually engages with a serious, rooted ideology - they will always lose to the Left.

>I'm against the idea that history should be studied to "prove" an ideology.
I'll disagree with you there; obviously if you read history to cherry-pick what you want then you're doing the wrong thing, but using history to try to understand how to produce a better present and future is perfectly legitimate.

>that's what I think is so dangerous
The perception that such actions are dangerous have I think led to a dangerous overreaction, where far more attention and emphasis is now being given to previously remoter fields of study in an attempt to prove either that medieval Europe was racially very diverse, or that contemporaneous civilisations were so far superior that medieval Europe has nothing worthwhile to teach us.

>people in the Middle Ages had no conception of progressivism, nor a conception of race anything like ours
Sure, but there are still bare facts. I doubt that anyone is arguing that people in Medieval Europe were explicit racists of the modern type, but the racial composition of their civilisation as well as their particular beliefs and actions are what's used as an argument.

A reasoned response, thank you user.

It's about politics in the field of medieval literature, so I think it's a grey area. I'd rather have some semblance actual discussion with anons, than just have some 15-year-olds infest the thread calling everyone niggers or kikes - that's why I posted it here.

kill yourself

>but using history to try to understand how to produce a better present and future is perfectly legitimate.
Perhaps, but then they should at least be willing to admit that their department is no more than a think tank.

Read Paul Gottfried. Leftism is a secularised theology of the managerial class. only political confrontation can stop it.

Attached: Screen Shot 2019-05-05 at 7.24.53 PM.png (193x284, 90K)

Thanks, good idea user!

Oh, I wasn't referring to academic historians, I was referring to people reading history. I think the people treating their departments as nothing more than think tanks are trying to control how and what history is studied in order to ensure that the only research being produced suits their views.

no other site would allow you to have this discussion, why is that? why are anonymous and unmoderated imageboards the only spaces resistant to the ideology of managerial progressivism, diversity and inclusion?

Minority-rule, perhaps? Most people want to speak their minds, but vocal minorities always end up corralling the conversation in their favour.

No problem lads

Fair enough. Medieval literature mentions non-european minorities only to the extent they were relevant, mainly mongol and turk invasions and crusades to north africa (fe .

SJWs tend to blackwash the topic and overrepresent the non-white ethnicities for whatever reason, like well, they do everywhere else by misrepresenting context to manufacture klansmen boogieman. That is THE political agenda at play here - contemporary, not historical. But what is there to add? Ideologues are gonna do their thing no matter what, the reason why they do it is elementary agitprop Machiavelli political theory. What's there to discuss?

I wonder who could be behind this article and post...

Attached: 1549036289536.gif (419x313, 2.84M)

>please stop talking about it...
Fuck off queer

You gotta feel sorry for American negroes. They only got their 85 IQ average (up from 65 in Africa, and probably below average even then as it was the stupider ones that got caught by the other negroes and sold to us) from their admixture of White blood, and despite years of privileges and affirmitive action are still failures as a group, although there are of course always outliers... And then we ended slavery and handed them back their freedom, they didn't even do that for themselves! They have expected gibs ever since... Negro fragility is a thing.

Attached: anti white hate PoC LOL.jpg (1024x1003, 156K)

I think a viable strategy for the right would be to accelerate the process of polarisation, to force the managers and bureaucrats to implement increasingly absurd and totalitarian measures of control, to the point where it becomes insufferable for most people, we can then promote our views to dissafected youth, take on the trappings of the counterculture and appropriate the economic discourse of the pre-managerial left. opposition to globalisation, consumerism, criticism of popular culture, these already read as right wing views. Instead of left vs right, it helps seeing politics in terms of homogenity vs heterogenity, the forces of managerial globohomo can only lead to a total homogenisation and levelling of culture, to a world of isolated nominally 'free'' individuals with no roots or history, dependent on the managerial state for validation.

>15 year olds
If you don't come to /pol/, then /pol/ comes to you.

>natural talent is a myth created by white supremacists to elevate the idea that certain people are inherently better than other people
back to plebbit, nigger

Attached: Cringe+a+kid+i+know_cd3932_6007138.jpg (661x805, 122K)

Well read about fucking knights then
Jesus fucking christ what is wrong with you bitchy fucking manchildren

Uh... being apolitical is inherently political you fucking bigot. Can’t you read?

Leftist hegemony depends on institutional control and the ability to intimidate the derives from it. Anonymity prevents them from being able to intimidate you. All other spaces are under constant pressure by the left.

Did you even read the rest of my post? I was joking.

but iq test racis :^((( kids in kenya dont recognize themself in mirror bcuz racism

Attached: 1543157042362.jpg (540x540, 81K)

>resistant to ideology
/pol/ is anything but. chans are merely contrarian, far from objective.

>YI see deez WHYPIPO Laquandashaunda
>dey be fittin t' TRYIN T' fitin t' REKKKOLONIZE dem (YOU)ROPEENS 'gen

Attached: _98493925_lola1.jpg (976x549, 94K)

unlike previous leftist coalitions, which joined together mass unionised labour with intellectual fellow travellers, the current leftist configuration is an alliance of politicised human resources officials with journalists, and elements of the security/surveillance state that were formerly regarded as very hostile to the left. Its a minority coalition that relies on panopticist power and social pressure(to oppose them or even to suggest they are being slightly unreasonable is to out oneself as racist, sexist and fascist, to allign oneself with the enemy). The radical left is irrelevant and anyways ruled by the same panopticist social dynamics.

This absolutely. It’s also entirely the fault of conservatives that they continually refuse to engage with the reality of global affairs. Fucking Tolqueville admitted that colonialisation has lead to a situation where African affairs will therefore be inseparable from those of Europe. Nearly two hundred years ago, and we still have brainlets on /pol/ talking about ‘mud huts’. Anti colonial struggle has been monopolized by left wingers as a winning optical strategy, not because of any inherent connection or goals, and it’s not going to go away just because some naive white boomers find it rude and excessive.

When you’ve got hundreds of thousands of skilled hard working immigrants coming to Western countries, and a right wing that ignores them (at best) while the left actively recruits and radicalizes them with anti-white propaganda and the reestablishment of segregated communities, that is inevitably going to become a problem.

The only right wing party thus far to seriously negotiate with immigrant groups has been the Harper’s Progressive Conservatives, and it won him a decade of power in Canadian affairs.

Sort of like Ted said, most conservatives have no idea of what they want to conserve. Until conservatives can figure out an unironically mulitcultural and cosmopolitan ideology (which was traditionally the case, if you examine the colonial era writings of European aristocrats or adventurers), they will always loose.

The Catholic Church is (along side the radical anticolonial left) one of the few institutions that instinctively realizes this, and is actively working on an alternative.

Without taking up the cause of ecology and multiculturalism, conservatives can not survive in the future. Both of these projects, environmental conservation and cultural conservation, must become synonymous with “Conservatism”, and contained in an overarching world-historical narrative if the right will have any chance of gaining influence and power.

I'd never heard of that game so I just looked it up and my god, every day I get more and more convinced the internet was a terrible fucking invention.
Someone asked a tumblr blogger if it was accurate that the game didn't have black people (it was, but the blog is about the needle in a haystack of some random Turk or lost Arab trader in medieval European cities), then several subreddits saw this as unacceptable SJW genocide of the proud gamer people, then stupid fucking smug clickfarm blogs wrote about it as a cataclysmic meltdown of millions of people and that cements it as A Serious Controversy™.
We need to nuke ourselves to hell and hope that horseshoe crabs can evolve into a better society.

Based and intelligent post

>along side the radical anticolonial left
they are not lol, they only project the neurotic subjectivity of 21st century first world liberals to some imagined noncolonial past, meanwhile they keep sucking the teat of the managerial state and cramming their faces with woke commodities.

they do have a telos for history, it's "a collection of ethnically ambiguous persons coming together to sell coffee to one another and maybe having casual sex afterward"

shut the fuck up you superfluous bitch jesus fucking christ

right wingers are the true anti-imperialists, the managerial leftist status quo is just an hegemonic imperialism that has grown secure enough to wear the skin of its defeated enemies as a mask. The decolonial ideology targets the same periphereal elites that in the 50s and 60s returned to their countries after receiving a western education and led maoist peasant guerrillas, pol pot attended sartre's courses at la sorbonne for one. Instead of striking against the economic supply chain of the core, the periphereal elites become managers and administrators dependent on the identity based control mechanisms of the western therapeutic corporate state. It also serves as a means of keeping the native population atomised, remember people are less likely to form families, join labour unions or attend religious congregations. You have no friends or community only 'allies'. On a personal level the ideology is based on enforced hedonistic consumption, 'self care' or 'empowerment'.

Leftism is tied up with social status. Absent a formal center within society that curates its moral tradition, elite elements within society can always accuse people of failing to live up to the true values of that tradition to expand their power, which is basically what we've had for the past few hundred years. On Yea Forums we're all one anonymous mass so you can't be named and shamed for failure to think the right things.

considering modern leftist's enthusiasm for 'sex work', they are probably coming together to sell sex too.

Attached: StrawmanCirc.jpg (200x199, 11K)

I’m not saying that the modern politics of academia have anything to do with genuine anti-colonialism (most of that works being done by Islamicists these days, desu), but they pay enough lip service to ally themselves with the emerginng third world middle class/elites by offering tangible economic benefits (often to people needing those benefits) with a hearty dose of ‘evil wyppl” propaganda.

It wouldn’t be hard for right wing organizations to offer things such as free English classes (with potential for job placement, and hiring of immigrants into the political party apparatus), host interfaith events (especially reaching out to Muslim/Hindu youth through lectures on conservative western thinkers such as Guenon or Calasso), finance the translation of certain conservative texts from the East, and adopt a more nuanced approach to the idea of the nation state (which appeared originally in direct opposition to conservative values and has acted corrosively against traditional institutions like dynasties and religion). Their failure to do so represents the abandonment of millions of potential supporters, and effectively hands the capitalist-managerial left (which promises economic incentives, media representation in the form of circus niggers, and a hardline stance on real problems of discrimination and racism) a demographic victory.

This is all true, but unless it’s translated into tangible organization and an effective institutional power grab its meaningless.

he's right

If the right ever gain power it will be through a military coup and genocide not having the right ideology

>and it’s not going to go away just because some naive white boomers find it rude and excessive.
The problem is that urbanites have used their the centralization of wealth and perspectives derived from living spaces where people are entirely decontextualized to strong arm nations into adopting anti-colonial moral positions. The only real alternative is the adoption of a new hostility towards the third world culminating in rehabilitation of genocide as a political practice

Expanding on this, it's inevitable that hundreds of thousands of Middle Easterners, Africans, and Muslims are going to pour into Western Countries over the next several decades. Denying this is denying ecological, demographic, and political reality. Here we on the Right have to decide which representation should be made available to these people (who now find themselves removed from local history and tradition and negotiating a new identity and self-image): people like Kim Kardashian and DJ Khaled (or for the more discerning, Mos Def), or Shaykh Abdal Hakim Murad, Robert Sarah, and Hamza Yusuf?

It's clear which way things are going now, but it doesn't have to be that way. The left's strategy book has been very successful, and if right wingers were to follow a two pronged attack by strategically flanking degenerate 'performers' and 'celebrities' with de-platforming maneuvers (which is something even the most stupid and deplorable right wing racists could get behind) while using what conservative media exists to strategically promote Imams, academics, and more wholesome celebrities it would do a lot to advance conservative causes and image.

It's also worth noting that this isn't merely a leftist symbolic maneuver of giving people someone who looks like them. A single lecture from Shaykh Abdal Hakim Murad is vastly more subversive and anti-modern than the entire corpus of Roger Scruton's pontificating about pretty buildings.

Attached: dj-khaled.jpg (2700x1800, 949K)

>The only real alternative is the adoption of a new hostility towards the third world culminating in rehabilitation of genocide as a political practice
Why?
>Pls let me in gringo!!!
>No.
How is this genocide.

fpbp

>How is the article clickbait?
kys nigger

Have you ever examined the actual demographics of the military though?

Can't speak for the rest of the world but in the US the people who do the trigger pulling are white, blacks and mexicans are mostly logistics/cooks/bureaucracy/diversity hires. The average IQ among these groups isn't high enough for them to be represented in a modern infantry.

Why is it inevitable here? Will east asia not suffer through this as well?

honestly I prefer devout muslims to sick liberal whites or neocons whose argument against islam amounts to 'dey da reel hommophobes/sexists'.

Seriously.

I've been afk for a bit and you're probably not in this thread anymore but in case you are
>something is happening to draw them to the field
again, you've said nothing. There's nothing to argue against in that statement because it doesn't propose anything. It's a "what if" on the level of a stoner wondering why we park in a driveway and drive in a parkway. If you want to propose a specific mechanic by which this is happening and establish an actual chain of causality you're welcome to, but I suspect you won't because you can't. All you can do is spitball and say "something is definitely going on here you guys"
perhaps nazis weren't attracted to medieval studies in the past because nazis didn't exist in the past. That a modern ideology might try to establish its foundation in older fields doesn't mean that those fields are inclined toward that ideology - precisely the opposite, in fact. It seems to me that medieval studies doesn't have a nazi problem, but that nazis have a medievalist problem. And I am being somewhat facetious in saying "nazis" - more appropriately it would be white nationalist/supremacist ideologies of various stripes.
One last approach to your statement: who the fuck cares? If all the author is doing is observing some interchange of ideas and isn't saying "medieval studies are problematic and need to be canceled!" then why is it presented as problematic? "Scholars have hotly debated the best way to counter the weaponization of the Middle Ages" - that's not a neutral observation, that's a call to action. If this is not an indictment of medievalism, then why make this call?

Kill yourself you fucking retard, etc etc

This is an idea that sounds appealing to some more moralistic/religious elements on the Right but the reality is, you can recover from social degeneracy, but it's much harder to recover from Islam.

t. child of the war on terror
face it the only reason you hate islam is because you have been indoctrinated by zionist interests and CIA/globohomo operatives who hate islam merely because it stops them from making the world gayer than it already is

Because the modern political class has opted to place most of their capital investment in the housing market, and needs an increasing population to maintain return on their investment. It's that simple really. Are you going to uproot our entire economic system because you want to live in the city but don't want to be around foreigners? Don't be naive

Combine that with global warming and demographics and it's no question where these immigrants will come from. Not to mention that a not insignificant amount of immigration is logistically inevitable, short of building a massive and expensive wall around every country and paying a small military to patrol it day and night.

Don't be so willfully naive and arrogant. Idiots like you are your own worst enemy. When you delude yourself about the capabilities of people around you, you'll only end up as a self satisfied looser.

Attached: the-majority-of-active-duty-personnel-are-white-at-70-but-white-americans-are-actually-underrepresen (735x453, 51K)

Because Spain is such a backwards shithole, right?

Attached: 1200px-Spain_Andalusia_Cordoba_BW_2015-10-27_12-11-57.jpg (1200x722, 171K)

No, it's because after a few hundred years you'll end up with a population having an average IQ of around 88-92 due to cosanguineous marriage that will never produce any advancements of note again. They may or may not be morally righteous, but you can be morally righteous without Islam and the other problems it causes.

>face it the only reason you hate islam is because you have been indoctrinated by zionist interests and CIA/globohomo operatives who hate islam merely because it stops them from making the world gayer than it already is
Literally every group that comes into nontrivial contact with Muslims has a Muslim problem (mostly Sunnis in practice), whether it's the PRC, Hindus, Buddhists, Europeans, African Christians and so on.

>when you call yourself a conservative because you'd rather be at the LA Pride Parade than here
Disgusting

Attached: fixedw_large_4x.jpg (1224x837, 418K)

When is this graph even from? Whites are only ~50% of the population in the US, probably less, once you account for MENA and Jews.

>Not to mention that a not insignificant amount of immigration is logistically inevitable, short of building a massive and expensive wall around every country and paying a small military to patrol it day and night.
Israel just shoot them

The problem isn't reading about knights, it is thinking knights are sacred.

this post is true, remember who invented decadence

1. You can recover from having Pride Parades. This sort of thing has happened before in history, usually preceding a societal collapse. We will most likely have one.
2. Muslims are in most cases in political coalition with the people staging the Pride Parades.
3. Muslims are becoming more pozzed anyway, so they'll just become another pressure group until the underlying problem is solved, which renders the whole "but muh slims will save us from modernity!" plan rather useless.

>the nails are also black
This is clearly a huwhitoid in blackhand. Disgusting!

I have no idea why conservatives haven’t considered actually building bridges with these minority populations and using that as a basis to strengthen the separate cultures of both the white majority and the ethnic minorities in their own separate spheres. Immigrants aren’t the enemy for conservatives— It’s the dishonest people who want to exploit them for political ends rather than caring for their interests.

>2. Muslims are in most cases in political coalition with the people staging the Pride Parades.
>3. Muslims are becoming more pozzed anyway, so they'll just become another pressure group until the underlying problem is solved, which renders the whole "but muh slims will save us from modernity!" plan rather useless.
The whole point is why this is happening, and what to do about it. You’ll notice I never said a thing about increasing the real rate of immigration, only about accepting the reality of it and working from that reality.
If you want to stick your head in the sand and place all your bets on some sort of retarded civilizatonal collapse scenario, where all the white people come together for retarded reasons and genocide all the brown people and suddenly the world is like the fifties because of some absolutely moronic notion of innate superiority, go ahead. You’re obviously too stupid and lazy to be of any use.

There are very few proper conservatives or nationalists in the West. It's mostly just neo-liberals, both on the "right" and on the "left".

>accepting the reality of it and working from that reality.
Or you could just stop letting them in and shoot the people who come illegally

Theres already enough white detritus in most first world nations, hoping and praying the non white ones wont be is silly

Can't speak for Europe here, but, assuming democracy exists, there's a non-trivial heritable element involved. In the US for example, indios are always going to vote for the same kind of parties that rule Latin America today, namely, "socialism" that amounts to "Lots of welfare for me and my family", and is not really all that socialistic, while also stoking some anti-white resentment. There's just not really any bridge that can be built between Latin American welfarism and American right-wingers.

This is happening because the progressive left and Islam are both driven by demonic influences in the world. Evil makes natural bedmates with evil.

>that image
Why do you propagate idiocy? Deny attention to such as these.

The "let's hitch everything to land/housing values" thing has been tried in history before, around the Fall of Rome, hasn't it?

Anyway, I don't really care what happens to "Western Civilization" at this point. If they're unwilling to tell a bunch of Africans or Arabs that no, you can't settle here, sorry, because they think it would be immoral to do so, you have a society that is simply kaput.

>The Catholic Church is (along side the radical anticolonial left) one of the few institutions that instinctively realizes this, and is actively working on an alternative.
What alternative would that be?
The current Pope talks like any mainstream Western politician.

I’m not sure about that. Sure, those old historical resentments are going to exist, but a form of reparation can be paid by actually providing them with jobs and social security. I think an actual socialist political movement that focuses on the class divide with neoliberalism as it’s opponent would make a very effective bridge.

>a form of reparation
they deserve fucking nothing

>fuck whites
>kaput
post nose

These aren’t free handouts, they’re just opportunities to better their own lives and thus develop sympathy for more conservative leaning policies. People will always vote which ever way gives them better living standards; ideology comes second.

>by actually providing them with jobs and social security
Modern american beuarocracies' function to provide niggers with dem gud gubment jobs and they only exist because of leeching off social security

Attached: 1555449817067.jpg (540x491, 30K)

Now you've radicalized approximately 11 million illegal immigrants, who are now forced between armed rebellion and a death sentence. You've also alienated 13% of your military (who is Hispanic, and almost certainly has friends/family/neighbors who are now being targeted by your faggy death squads), and every single voter who isn't criminally insane.
Are you really so stupid you think anything good would come out of that? I hope for your own sake you're just a dedicated troll.

>anything good would come out of that
genocide

Kek

Give this a read:
w2.vatican.va/content/francesco/en/encyclicals/documents/papa-francesco_20150524_enciclica-laudato-si.html
it's pretty fascinating. There are some similarities,but the conception of reality, economics, life, etc. come from completely different principles.

We do provide them with jobs and social security. Huge numbers of them are using fake Social Security cards as it is and they get affirmative action.

so take credit for it and turn that into social/political capital you fucking mong.

Also, you're ignoring that Latin American "socialism" has been a low-key race struggle in many cases.